I am a little more pissed about Wallace not going from the Steelers. Aaron Rodgers maybe the most overrated QB of this year if it wasn't for Peyton Manning and Philip Rivers. Ryan should go, he has had a great year and Drew is the returning Super Bowl champ. The Pro-Bowl like all All Start voting is based on named brands. I would suggest Joe Flacco or even Matt Cassel over the other two AFC QBs, hell if Ben wasn't out for the first five games he would be a shoe in.

Originally posted by lotjxI am a little more pissed about Wallace not going from the Steelers. Aaron Rodgers maybe the most overrated QB of this year if it wasn't for Peyton Manning and Philip Rivers. Ryan should go, he has had a great year and Drew is the returning Super Bowl champ. The Pro-Bowl like all All Start voting is based on named brands. I would suggest Joe Flacco or even Matt Cassel over the other two AFC QBs, hell if Ben wasn't out for the first five games he would be a shoe in.

Overrated? Really? While I don't have an issue with the three NFC QBs who made it, I'd really argue about calling the QB with the 4th highest passer rating in the leauge "overrated".

Aaron Rodgers maybe the most overrated QB of this year if it wasn't for Peyton Manning and Philip Rivers. Drew is the returning Super Bowl champ.

I don't get why Brees would be deserving and Manning wouldn't when they have almost identical numbers. Phil Rivers is certainly a loser though, no sarcasm.

I am a little more pissed about Wallace not going from the Steelers

I knew Wallace wouldn't make it without the pure receptions but he's on his way. I thought the shame for the Steelers was them getting only two defensive players, compared to four from Balty and four from New England's apparently awesome 30th ranked pass defense. Hampton should've gone for anchoring the runaway #1 defense against the run, and Farrior or Timmons would've been more deserving than mascot Ray Lewis. It hardly matters because the criteria for this thing is inherently dumb and will always lead to internet threads being like WHAT THE WRONG? but I like to see the players from me make it because yay them :) yay Pouncey :)

I'd say they should expand the roster from 45 to 53 just for funsies but that's what ends up happening anyway when half the guys bow out.

Originally posted by lotjxI am a little more pissed about Wallace not going from the Steelers. Aaron Rodgers maybe the most overrated QB of this year if it wasn't for Peyton Manning and Philip Rivers. Ryan should go, he has had a great year and Drew is the returning Super Bowl champ. The Pro-Bowl like all All Start voting is based on named brands. I would suggest Joe Flacco or even Matt Cassel over the other two AFC QBs, hell if Ben wasn't out for the first five games he would be a shoe in.

Rodgers is overrated? Wow. Don't understand how you can say that.

Originally posted by JustinShapiroI knew Wallace wouldn't make it without the pure receptions but he's on his way. I thought the shame for the Steelers was them getting only two defensive players, compared to four from Balty and four from New England's apparently awesome 30th ranked pass defense. Hampton should've gone for anchoring the runaway #1 defense against the run, and Farrior or Timmons would've been more deserving than mascot Ray Lewis. It hardly matters because the criteria for this thing is inherently dumb and will always lead to internet threads being like WHAT THE WRONG? but I like to see the players from me make it because yay them :) yay Pouncey :)

I'd say they should expand the roster from 45 to 53 just for funsies but that's what ends up happening anyway when half the guys bow out.

I'm a Pats fan and even I can't understand how Merriweather made it. He wasn't even the 3rd best safety in NE, never mind the AFC. I thought Champ Bailey would be taken as the 3rd CB but McCourty has had a nice season. He's definitely in the running for Defensive ROY.

"John McCain ran for president in 2000. Why couldn't we have elected him then? When he was sane." - Lewis Black

I'd say the wrong Packers cornerback made it (Woodson instead of Tramon), but if there was room for DeAngelo Hall, then really both Packers should have made it.

It is the policy of the documentary crew to remain true observers and not interfere with its subjects."Well. Shit." -hansen9jGo Pack Go! (9-6, 2nd NFC North)Let's Go Riders! (getting pretty tired of being the bridesmaid)

Before addressing this whole Aaron Rodgers debate let me go off on a homer tangent. Brent Grimes is starting to get some recognition, but if he doesn't make it to the Pro Bowl as an alternate I won't be satisfied (assuming, of course, he'd even want to play, hint hint). The man is 5'9 on a good day and leads the league in passes defensed.

ANYWAY...

Aaron Rodgers IS overrated. Fantasy football practically runs real football these days, and as a result all anybody seems to care about is stats, stats, stats. But the problem with that is they only care about individual stats. I would even go as far as saying that for most people watching a given game, who wins and who loses is way less important than who gets how many yards. And in that world, Aaron Rodgers is king (or at least crown prince).

But what has he won? Nothing! At least not yet. And to top it off, he doesn't come through in the clutch the way a great QB should. And you know what else? After watching his latest concussion I'm not so sure he makes the best decisions either.

That doesn't mean he's a bad quarterback, just that he's not the second coming of Joe Montana/Peyton Manning/Tom Brady/Johnny Unitas like everyone makes him out to be.

Originally posted by StingArmyAaron Rodgers IS overrated. Fantasy football practically runs real football these days, and as a result all anybody seems to care about is stats, stats, stats. But the problem with that is they only care about individual stats. I would even go as far as saying that for most people watching a given game, who wins and who loses is way less important than who gets how many yards. And in that world, Aaron Rodgers is king (or at least crown prince).

But what has he won? Nothing! At least not yet. And to top it off, he doesn't come through in the clutch the way a great QB should. And you know what else? After watching his latest concussion I'm not so sure he makes the best decisions either.

This makes about as much sense as saying Felix Hernandez isn't the best pitcher in the American League because he didn't get the most wins.

Only one team from the NFC can go to the Super Bowl each year. In the two years since Rodgers took over as starter in Green Bay, the NFC representatives have been Kurt Warner's Cardinals and Drew Brees' Saints. So if Rodgers had gone to a Super Bowl already, would that mean that at least one of those two aren't great quarterbacks?

And are you saying Eli Manning is better than Rodgers because Manning has been a member of a Super Bowl winner? If your answer is no, make sure stats have nothing to do with your reasoning, because stats are for fantasy football geeks and not intelligent football fans. Is Eli exactly as good as his brother, since they've both won one? Is he better than Dan Marino? Dan Fouts? Jim Kelly? Warren Moon?

Was Drew Brees not an elite quarterback until February 2010?

And so on.

Edit: Two more: If the Packers win the Super Bowl this year, will Rodgers have gone from "good" to "whatever you call a quarterback who is better than good" in the span of a month in your eyes? And do you think who won Super Bowls in 2009 or any year before that should be the criteria for choosing who has had the best year in 2010?

Here's a line I'm going to just copy from Wikipedia, it's not really a fantasy football stat, so maybe it will have SOME legitimacy in your view: "Through Week 16 of the 2010-11 NFL season, Rodgers' career passer rating (98.6) ranks first all-time among NFL quarterbacks with at least 1,500 passing attempts."

Originally posted by StingArmyAaron Rodgers IS overrated. Fantasy football practically runs real football these days, and as a result all anybody seems to care about is stats, stats, stats. But the problem with that is they only care about individual stats. I would even go as far as saying that for most people watching a given game, who wins and who loses is way less important than who gets how many yards. And in that world, Aaron Rodgers is king (or at least crown prince).

But what has he won? Nothing! At least not yet. And to top it off, he doesn't come through in the clutch the way a great QB should.

I can't remember who this was against, which is why I didn't mention it in my previous post, and now I can't quickly find any reference to it online, so I'm hoping hansen9j, CRZ, or some other Packer fan can help me out with this.

Sometime this season, I saw a Rodgers play that cemented my high opinion of him. The Packers had the ball at about the 2 yard line, and came out in a shotgun formation. The defense came out clearly expecting a pass and didn't really crowd the line. Rodgers saw this, and went up to the line acting like he was pointing out blocking schemes to his linemen, but he actually slyly slipped under center, took a quick snap and walked into the endzone untouched for a score. It was a brilliant play, it reminded me of Dan Marino's fake spike against the Jets. Rodgers saw a weakness in the defense and came up with a creative way to exploit it, it was brilliant.

The only quarterbacks I would take over Rodgers right now are Peyton Manning and Tom Brady. I'd put Brees, Roethlisberger, and Rodgers in a three-way tie for third because I lack the guts to pick between the three of them, but given that Rodgers is in only his third year as a starter, I'd have to say he still has his best achievements ahead of him.

Originally posted by TheBucsFanI can't remember who this was against, which is why I didn't mention it in my previous post, and now I can't quickly find any reference to it online, so I'm hoping hansen9j, CRZ, or some other Packer fan can help me out with this.

Sometime this season, I saw a Rodgers play that cemented my high opinion of him. The Packers had the ball at about the 2 yard line, and came out in a shotgun formation. The defense came out clearly expecting a pass and didn't really crowd the line. Rodgers saw this, and went up to the line acting like he was pointing out blocking schemes to his linemen, but he actually slyly slipped under center, took a quick snap and walked into the endzone untouched for a score. It was a brilliant play, it reminded me of Dan Marino's fake spike against the Jets. Rodgers saw a weakness in the defense and came up with a creative way to exploit it, it was brilliant.

The only quarterbacks I would take over Rodgers right now are Peyton Manning and Tom Brady. I'd put Brees, Roethlisberger, and Rodgers in a three-way tie for third because I lack the guts to pick between the three of them, but given that Rodgers is in only his third year as a starter, I'd have to say he still has his best achievements ahead of him.

Ben and Brees have rings while Rodgers is probably looking at stumbling into a first or second round lost. I don't know if I would put Eli ahead of Rodgers, but he has made better plays as you described on much bigger stages. I would call it even. Rivers, I would consider overrated and I am sure Charger fans would rather have Brees back who is a leader then Philip "everyone else fault by mine" Rivers.

Also, Felix Hernandez shouldn't have won the Cy Young. I can't believe none of those losses were the result of his play. I understand his team has little or no offense, but he had double digit losses. Its all about stats and not about wins which is the problem. Stats are meaningless if you can't win games. Its great for contract talks, but useless in games. I also take exception with CC Sabiath being left out in the cold, because he is a Yankee. I would say he has a harder job, because players get up to the Yankees where has no one gives a shit about playing the Mariners. Its a stat boy world when it comes to awards and mostly in All Star voting. The only stat I care about is wins and losses that is why Ryan is going in instead of Rodgers which is fine.

Originally posted by lotjxBen and Brees have rings while Rodgers is probably looking at stumbling into a first or second round lost. I don't know if I would put Eli ahead of Rodgers, but he has made better plays as you described on much bigger stages. I would call it even.

Ben and Brees have also been starters for twice as long and had more opportunities to succeed or fail. Rodgers may have been anointed elite too soon, but he's had one playoff game and he put up like a million points in it so it's not like he underperformed compared to his regular season production the way Rivers has. Eli has kind of legit stunk in every playoff game he's played outside of the 2007 run.

Roethlisberger has been preternaturally successful because he's a) pretty special IMO, and b) was drafted into a unique situation on an already strong team that was able to add him because of a rare down year. But Brees' postseason heroics were nonexistent before last year (1-2 playoff record, missed playoffs three of the last four years) so, what, he sucked until he just as suddenly ruled?

Also, Felix Hernandez shouldn't have won the Cy Young. I can't believe none of those losses were the result of his play. I understand his team has little or no offense, but he had double digit losses. Its all about stats and not about wins which is the problem. Stats are meaningless if you can't win games.

Originally posted by TheBucsFanSometime this season, I saw a Rodgers play that cemented my high opinion of him. The Packers had the ball at about the 2 yard line, and came out in a shotgun formation. The defense came out clearly expecting a pass and didn't really crowd the line. Rodgers saw this, and went up to the line acting like he was pointing out blocking schemes to his linemen, but he actually slyly slipped under center, took a quick snap and walked into the endzone untouched for a score. It was a brilliant play, it reminded me of Dan Marino's fake spike against the Jets. Rodgers saw a weakness in the defense and came up with a creative way to exploit it, it was brilliant.

I think you're referring to the Miami game. I actually never got a chance to see the play, as I was at a Rider game when it happened.

And to top it off, he doesn't come through in the clutch the way a great QB should.

These are the last possessions of the fourth quarter in the four Rodgers' losses:Chicago: Completes pass to James Jones, who gets stripped.Washington: Driver for winning field goal, which hits the uprights.Miami: The above sneak for a tying touchdown.Atlanta: Touchdown pass on fourth down.

What a choker.

It is the policy of the documentary crew to remain true observers and not interfere with its subjects."Well. Shit." -hansen9jGo Pack Go! (9-6, 2nd NFC North)Let's Go Riders! (getting pretty tired of being the bridesmaid)

Rodgers is a very good QB. However, one of the 'it' factors for QB's is leading teams in the 4th quarter to come from behind or win when tied. Since he became a starting QB in '08 Rodgers has done it 4 times (2 against the '08 Lions). Matt Ryan came in the league in '08, and he has done it 13 times. Now, the Packers defense has spit the bit in some games after Rodgers led them back, but when you start differentiating the upper level he hasn't broken through.

(Most of this post is directed at TheBucsFan, but it applies generally to anyone saying Aaron Rodgers is a great quarterback.)

I said:

1. He hasn't won anything yet.2. He's not clutch.3. He makes bad decisions.

You replied:

1. What do you mean he hasn't won anything yet! So what! Eli Manning has won something, is he better than Aaron Rodgers? Only won team can win each year. Is Eli as good as Peyton? Is Eli better than etc etc etc. "And so on."2. (punt)3. (punt)

Way to turn my argument into "Eli Manning is better than a bunch of Hall of Fame quarterbacks," which is patently ridiculous, has nothing to do with anything anyone was saying, and conveniently ignores the other two points I made.

First of all, my saying he hasn't won anything ("yet" is what I said, mind you) is just pointing out how ridiculous I think it is that a practically brand new QB, who hasn't had the CHANCE to accomplish much yet in the league, is being compared to the likes of Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. That doesn't mean if another QB's team wins a Super Bowl I automatically declare that QB to be great. One does not lead to the other. But since you asked, Jim Kelly won four consecutive conference championships, Dan Marino has won one (and probably several more division championships), and Warren Moon won like half a dozen CFL championships. So I'd say they've won at least something in their careers. (And they're all also obviously great and have proven that over decades worth of play, so your comparison to Eli Manning is nonsensical and merits no further discussion).

But let's talk about the other 67% of my post that you completely ignored. First, his decision making.

Passer rating is a pretty respectable stat, and takes a lot of things into account, I'll grant you that. But it doesn't take sacks into account, and that's a huge oversight, especially when you're talking about someone who plays like Aaron Rodgers. The man takes WAY too many sacks. He was the most sacked QB in the 2009 regular season. He took more sacks that year than the much-maligned Jay Cutler has taken this year, but nobody seems to talk about that (now or then). In fact, he was the second-most sacked QB in last year's postseason-- and he only played in one game!

The fact that he takes so many sacks, ironically enough, artificially raises his profile. If Rodgers wasn't holding the ball so dang long all the time (i.e., if he was passing more often), it's not that large of a leap to say his completion percentage would go down and his interception totals would go up. And thus, his oh-so-impressive passer rating would go down. And let's not overlook the fact that all those sacks lead to too many fumbles and too many injuries, both of which can really hurt a team.

Here's the crux of my argument though: HE IS NOT CLUTCH!!! Great quarterbacks are not made in garbage time. They're made in crunch time. Don't get me wrong, I certainly care about a quarterback's entire performance, from the first quarter on, so don't think I'm writing all that off. But I think what separates mediocre QBs from good QBs and good QBs from great QBs is what they do when the game hangs in the balance. Aaron Rodgers has exactly ONE game-winning TD pass in his entire career (first game of last season versus the Bears). Just one. Not in the same league as Brees, Brady, (Peyton) Manning, Matt Ryan, or even Vick who are known for leading their respective teams in the crunch. To be fair, he's only had two real seasons to work with (I'll be kind and throw out the 2008 season since the rest of his team was abominable), but in that amount of time, most OTHER "great" quarterbacks would have more game-winning drives under their belts.

But we don't even have to focus on game-winning drives. Let's generalize that a bit and talk about what Aaron Rodgers does after half time in close games. This year, 9 of the Packers' 15 games were decided by 7 points or less. This is fantastic for our discussion. The really great teams either blow everyone out, win the close ones, or some combination of both. The same can be said about individual performers: if you're one of the great ones, you either dominate everyone ALL the time or at the very least you show up for your team when they need you the most.

So, here's a little bit of research. In games this year decided by 7 points or less, Aaron Rodgers has only 3 TDs in the second half or OT (only 1 in the fourth quarter or later). That is... anemic. But wait! It gets worse. In those same situations, he has 6 interceptions and 4 fumbles. So there are some qualitative stats (rather than the purely quantitative ones fantasy football is so obsessed with) for you to digest.

Not exactly great, wouldn't you agree? He's not a BAD quarterback, he's just overrated. He can throw for 6,000 yards a season and be the top-drafted fantasy QB every year, and that's great for him. I have no problem with him or the Packers (no threat to my team as far as I'm concerned). But if someone gave me the choice between THAT and another guy that only throws for 3,000 yards but helps my team win close games, it's a no-brainer which one I would (and should) take.

Originally posted by StingArmyTo be fair, he's only had two real seasons to work with (I'll be kind and throw out the 2008 season since the rest of his team was abominable), but in that amount of time, most OTHER "great" quarterbacks would have more game-winning drives under their belts.

shrug. I thought he was put in the top echelon last year before he really earned it but I also feel like his starting career hasn't been long enough to define him as someone who fails when it counts since he really hasn't had a chance to, although Packers have probably underperformed relative to expectations the last two years. I only pay sporadic attention to ESPN/NFLN talking head analysis stuff because it's so braindead but I thought "can Rodgers get it done in the clutch?" was part of the general narrative about him.

His sacks are down an entire sack per game this year, FWIW.

A lot of the argument in this thread seems to be about how people define the adjectives good, great, elite, etc. Probably calls for rrrrrrankings, that's always a concise and easy debate.